Limey_p

Jack, thanks. There is indeed a cookie called anonlogin. Or rather, there was a cookie. I deleted it and didn't even have to log in again. Andy

When I set up my forum account I chose to be anonymous when accessing the forums. How do I change that now? I could not find the setting in any of my profile or board settings. Also searching help for anonymous had no info. ap

I would guess that a lot of the players in this event have never played behind screens before? If this is the case, I can imagine the new procedures will be a major distraction to the players and will cause slow play. So perhaps some sort of compromise? Allow extra time for the first few matches so that the "novices" can become comfortable? Andy

Why no blackwood? Responder could have, over 4♣. Opener bypassed it by bidding 5♦. I think opener's 5D bid promises no heart control, something like a low doubleton, so it is incorrect imo. And I'd expect 5N to be some sort of "pick a slam", because I thought it had to be a jump to be grand slam force. Andy

(I don't know if the software supports this ...) Another possibility to get a result on the board is to restart the bidding before the subs sit down. Then they can have an entire sequence of their own. AP

This is a Beginner/Intermediate question imo. the odds are 11:10 in favor of the drop, which corresponds to the number of empty spaces in each opponent's hand. Is 52.38% exact enough? AP

For a passed hand, I like straight DONT. My thinking is that you're much more liklely to have a minor oriented hand. So: x = single suit 2c = clubs & another 2d = diamonds + a major 2h = h + s Andy

I thought the standard inverted minors ageement was "limit or better in our suit" rather than just limit or better. So I consider 1♦ - 2♦ - 2N as forcing unless responder rebids 3♦. Similarly if an auction started 1♦ - 2♦ - 2♥ - 3♥ I would presume it is forcing. From the discussion above, I'd say things are not necessarily standardized [as though this was news]. But isn't this really a rerun of sayc or acol 2-level responses as compared to two over one? And in a two over one system, it would seem more consistent to carry the philosophy to the inverted minors also. BTW bridge world standard is its usual terse self in this area, although it does have the agreement that the inverted minor denies a major. This was carried over from the previous bws, so was not recently polled [polls are on line at http://www.bridgeworld.com/default.asp?d=b...f=bwspolls.html] Andy

In the US, strong notrumps rule the roost. The mainstream here is as Hannie says - new suits after Stayman or transfers are game forcing, and probably slam invitational if a minor. I'd say the options with this hand are a. Stayman then bid diamonds (my choice, but if that's invitational, it is out). b. Transfer to diamonds then either i. bid 3♥, if it natural. Pard can then choose 3N without fit, otherwise show support. A new suit from opener on this type of sequence should agree responder's second suit. ii. in bridge world standard (bws), a new suit after a minor transfer shows shortness, so here you could bid 3♠. But you're very unlikely to ever get to hearts after this start! c. (As Luis suggests) start with 3♦ natural and forcing. Though most people here use 3D for something else, strong with both minors is common. Andy

My first thought was to try diamonds first, then fall back on hearts if necessary. This would mean this order of play: ♦A ♦Q ♦K ♥J for a finesse. Without any other late hand entry, you have to take first round finesse. But Greg's line is good too - so which is better? We start using a priori probabilities. My line needs ♥3-2 with the queen onside; half of 68% is 34%. Greg's wins when the ♥Q is singleton or doubleton. Thats one fifth of 28% plus two fifths of 68%. Thats (er) 5.6 plus 27.2 which is 33%. That's close! But my line is not that good - when diamonds are sour, East has them, so he has less room in his hand for hearts. So instead of half of 68% it'll be more like (adding up open spaces in each hand) 9/21 or three sevenths. That's only 28%, I think. So I say Greg has it. BTW I've set out the numbers this way because it represents about the limit that I would be able to accomplish at the table without pencil and paper, and I'd probably not manage that with the flu, either. But my line isn't ridiculous, and if that's the worst I do in a session, I'll have done pretty well. Andy

Around these parts (Philadelphia, USA) the norm is that an inverted minor raise denies a four card major. What system benefits or costs are implied by this? why should it be so, or is it just a common agreement? My thought is this: why should an inverted minor be different from any other two over one? It can be more descriptive to establish a force by bidding at the two level. Also, it is more "natural" to show your longest suit first. Assume a basic system like BBO advanced or BWS, at least for the first go round. Then if you are brave, is your answer the same when you are responding to a precision 1♦? Andy

I completely disagree. Amount of gain or loss versus frequency gives a total expectation. Any discussion is incomplete if you ignore frequencies. I play ordinary BWS-type methods which lead, imho, to good results. They come up more often when playing weak. How can you argue with that? he said throwing down the gauntlet ;)

The chief advantage to the weak NT is that there are more of them! you get to use all your fun toys (stayman, transfers etc) more often.

I voted for double then 2N. Any thoughts for 2S? is that hearts and a minor or is it any two suiter?

Meryl Streep Tom Hanks

I like the first round 4♥ bid. And yes, I'd raise 4♠ to 5. Andy

I like the auction. Don't change a thing!

The short answer is you need an agreement. I don't know there's a standard, and you and I might reasonably differ on the meaning of "semi forcing", at least until we've discussed it. I'd like to, opposite a known 5-card major. I play drury and I guess this hand would qualify. Without drury or opposite a 4-card opener, it is an ugly problem. It's not a position I would take, even at matchpoints. I see the hand as having a "suit aspect" - you have primary honors in the long suits, and no real stoppers outside. Andy

I would bid 3♣. I'd save the 3-card spade bid for some other hand, most likely when rho has passed and you have to find a bid. Pard may rarely double with only 3 sapdes himself? I do play support doubles on this sort of sequence, but this isn't the hand for it. To me, a support double is a type of takeout double, and here you cannot stand a diamond bid from pard. Andy

We men need outlets for our stupidity. And bridge will only take us part way there. Isn't football better than the alternative, hitting each other with sticks and rocks? Andy

giraffe? 1♦

great thread! I go ♠Q here at matchpoints, ♥Q at imps.

With trumps 1-4, I'd still use essentially the same line, only without cashing the ♥A ... but now I need righty to hold 2 or more ♦s, or he can force me to take the spade hook. AP

I totally agree with duck at trick 1. Since it is matchpoints I try to make 5: ruff trick 2 A♥ K♦ A♦ more diamonds etc and if the hand is friendly I'll never need the spade finesse - the trump lead is a weak suggestion that the finesse is off.

I had to google it because I didn't know the term. It *does* seem to be a now-legitimate term refering to one-day matches. And there was me thinking it had something to do with other games played with or without pyjamas.